ESRA 2025 Preliminary Program

Monday 14 July    Tuesday 15 July    Wednesday 16 July    Thursday 17 July    Friday 18 July   

All time references are in CEST

Promises and Problems of factorial surveys and conjoint experiments - lessons from application examples in different fields
Session Organisers	Dr Hawal Shamon (Forschungszentrum Jülich) Professor Knut Petzold (Hochschule Zittau/Görlitz)
Time	Wednesday 16 July, 11:00 - 12:30
Room	Ruppert 040

-

Papers

Opinion Over Evidence: How Adolescents Handle Biases

Dr Elena Sestini (University of Siena) - Presenting Author

Sensitivity to biases in decision-making and preference formation is a well-documented vulnerability in human behavior. The way information is presented, including its language, frame, and tone, strongly influences individual choices and can lead to suboptimal outcomes. We found evidence that people's trust significantly depends on the authority figure and their gender in controlled scenarios. Understanding these impactful biases is crucial for policy makers.

This study presents the outcomes of a vignette survey experiment involving high school students across Italy (N = 514), with the aim of examining how adolescents' beliefs are shaped by exposure to current and controversial topics.
The goal was to demonstrate how common biases influence everyday perceptions. The survey employed six independent experimental designs based on different vignettes, including visual vignettes, to measure gender and authority discrimination in information approval. Each experimental scenario was designed to isolate and quantify the impact of specific biases. We also measured the effect of statistical presentation, reference points, and framing effects. The content covered social, environmental, scientific and economic themes.

The preliminary results confirm that biases significantly influence decisions in four out of six scenarios. News presented in an emotional tone tends to be perceived as less credible, while awareness of social opinions about news can alter individual perceptions, regardless of the content itself. The study highlights a pronounced sensitivity to biases associated with gender and authority figures, as well as to the statistical language used to present quantitative information.

These results highlight the considerable influence biases can have in political, commercial, and regulatory contexts, particularly in shaping the adherence to policies or marketing strategies. By identifying the biases that are most likely to shape the perspectives of adolescents, this study provides valuable insights for policy makers and educators seeking to mitigate their effects.

Faith, Fear, and Intervention: Unravelling Dynamics in Religiously Motivated Hate Crimes through Vignette Experiments

Ms Sophie Litvak (University of Helsinki) - Presenting Author

Religiously motivated hate crimes profoundly affect young victims, heightening their vulnerability to psychological harm such as depression and suicidal tendencies. Despite their prevalence, these crimes are significantly under-reported, highlighting the need for innovative research methodologies. This study employs vignette experiments to explore bystander behaviour in public hate crime scenarios, focusing on the complex interplay between victim characteristics and intervention dynamics.

Conducted across four countries with 1,000 respondents each (N=4,000), this research aims to examine public attitudes towards hate crime sanctions, analyse bystander behaviour in simulated hate crime scenarios, and investigate how victim characteristics and participants’ religious affiliation influence the willingness to intervene. This presentation centres on the third objective (N=2,000), addressing the 'who, why, and for whom' of intervention decisions, with particular emphasis on the victim’s religion (Jewish, Muslim, and non-religious) and participants’ religious affiliation.

The use of vignette experiments provides a controlled yet realistic framework to investigate these dynamics, revealing key insights into decision-making processes and social attitudes. The findings highlight both expected intervention trends and surprising behavioural patterns. These results contribute to a broader understanding of the mechanisms underpinning discrimination and bystander intervention, offering valuable implications for hate crime prevention strategies and social policy development.

What do people look for in egg cell and sperm donors?

Dr Sandra Gilgen (University of Zurich) - Presenting Author
Ms Larissa Fritsch (University of Zurich)
Professor Jörg Rössel (University of Zurich)

With the rapid growth of the possibilities and accessibility of assisted reproduction in modern societies, the question arises: What do people look for in an egg cell and sperm donor? To assess the criteria that people look for in egg cell and sperm donors and to test for potential discrimination and differences in expectations depending on the sex of the donor, we designed a choice experiment (CE) including age, height, body weight, eye colour, personality, attractiveness, educational level and religion of the donor. The CE was embedded in the second wave of the Swiss Assisted Reproductive Longitudinal Study (CHARLS), which will be launched in February 2025.
In line with qualitative research on companies selling sex cells (Almeling, 2011), we expect to find gendered differences in what is deemed most important for egg cell vs sperm donors, with attractiveness and personality being more important for egg cell donors and status (measured through education) more important for sperm donors.
Since the CE is embedded within a general population survey and we also included a question on egg cell and sperm donor criteria in wave 1, we are also in a unique position to cross-validate our findings from the experiment with the answers to a direct question.
With our research, we thus aim to uncover gendered norms that exist in regard to what is expected of female and male sex cell donors. The findings will allow us to not only gain insight into what traits people are looking to transmit to their offspring more broadly, but also on the gendered expectations and potential discrimination when it comes to reproduction.

Comparing Vignette and Survey Approaches to Assessing the Impact of Dark Triad Traits on Deviant Workplace Behaviour

Dr Lode De Waele (Utrecht University) - Presenting Author
Dr Kristyna Basna (Institute of Sociology of the CAS)
Professor Pablo Sanabria-Pulido (Universidad EAFIT)

In the contemporary organisational landscape, the relation between personality traits and ethical behaviour has garnered considerable attention, particularly within the realms of organisational behaviour and ethics. Among these frameworks, the Dark Triad—comprising Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy—stands out for its potential to illuminate the underpinnings of unethical behaviours in the workplace. This study examines the methodological implications of using vignettes versus survey questions to measure the impact of these traits on Deviant Workplace Behaviour (DWB) in contrasting organisational contexts. Leveraging two datasets, we analyse employees from a public sector and private sector organisation.
Our approach compares findings from vignettes—which simulate workplace scenarios to assess behavioural tendencies in context—to traditional survey questions measuring self-reported traits and behaviours. This dual-method analysis investigates whether vignette-based approaches yield more specific insights and mitigate biases often associated with self-reported data.
By focusing on the discriminatory potential of organisational contexts, this research aligns with the panel’s emphasis on inequalities in the workplace. The findings contribute to understanding how structural differences between public and private sectors influence ethical climates and individual tendencies toward deviance, thereby offering actionable insights for fostering inclusivity and fairness in diverse organisational settings.

Solidarity, but not for everyone! The Causal Effect of Social Identity on Costly Solidarity Behavior in a Two-Wave Large-Scale Survey Experiment

Professor Achim Goerres (Universität Duisburg-Essen)
Professor Markus Tepe (Universität Bremen)
Mr Jakob Eicheler (Universität Duisburg-Essen) - Presenting Author

How does the identity of others affect solidarity behavior? Solidarity is a valuable resource for societies as it helps address multiple collective action problems. Processes of social fragmentation and political polarization that emphasize citizens’ social identities have been proposed to threaten solidarity. This study tests the causal impact of socioeconomic (age, income, ancestry) and political (party preference) markers of group membership that can constitute social identities in shaping solidarity behavior. It argues that social identities may have a dual effect on solidarity behavior, increasing solidarity with ingroup members and decreasing solidarity with outgroup members. To test this argument, we conduct a large-scale two-wave survey experiment in which respondents play the Solidarity Game and in consecutive vignettes receive truthful information about their group members’ socioeconomic or political affiliations. Our analysis shows that (1) respondents in a homogeneous group show higher levels of solidarity, and (2) they tend to give more to social groups whose members are constructed as deserving. (3) Respondents react most negatively to the presence of members of socially undesirable groups (AfD voters). The study discusses the results’ methodological, empirical, and theoretical implications.